No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Amazon RDS vs Google Cloud SQL comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Amazon RDS
Ranking in Database as a Service (DBaaS)
2nd
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
8th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
59
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Google Cloud SQL
Ranking in Database as a Service (DBaaS)
7th
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
18th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Database Management Systems (DBMS) (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Database as a Service (DBaaS) category, the mindshare of Amazon RDS is 12.6%, down from 22.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Google Cloud SQL is 6.6%, down from 13.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Database as a Service (DBaaS) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Amazon RDS12.6%
Google Cloud SQL6.6%
Other80.8%
Database as a Service (DBaaS)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2592669 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director Software Engineer at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
Positive experiences with database services, with minor room for feature enhancements observed
I don't really see any disadvantages of Amazon RDS. With Oracle, I think AWS doesn't provide the RAC stability. If you have Oracle installed in your own data centers, you can set up various clusters and we can set up the RACs, but in Amazon RDS, we cannot have the RAC feature of Oracle. They could add that feature. Amazon RDS has limitations regarding RAC. If we talk about installing Oracle in RDS, we cannot have the RAC, but if you deploy Oracle on GCP, then there is probably the RAC feature available. I observed that around two or three years back, but I'm not sure whether they have added the RAC feature in AWS. Amazon RDS is expensive compared to GCP. GCP also has the same features, and although it is quite extensive and feature-rich, I see Amazon RDS as slightly expensive compared to other clouds.
RituRaj - PeerSpot reviewer
SDE 2 at Virtusa
Drag and drop workflows have simplified data mapping and currently improve my cloud database work
The IPaaS Connector, which I have found most valuable, is part of Google Cloud SQL. Google Cloud's user interface is really good, which improves efficiency in my database operations. The UI is excellent, making it easier to understand what we are doing. Currently, I am working on IPaaS Connector, so it is really just a clickable interface without writing any code. I simply use drag and drop and connecting lines, and it is working. Google Cloud SQL's global infrastructure improves our database's latency metrics because we are using Gemini in our project. Since both are products of Google, it makes our product faster.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The time to install or set up a database environment is very fast."
"It is stable, scalable, and easy to deploy."
"The impact of Amazon RDS scalability and backup has been positive, with good vertical scaling, scale up and down, horizontal scaling, and storage scaling."
"Amazon RDS makes it easier for me to manage databases compared to traditional databases like MongoDB or local host servers."
"Very easy to start with."
"Amazon RDS provides data encryption using services like KMS, crucial for securing high-sensitive data and meeting compliance requirements such as HIPAA or PCI DSS."
"It is very easy to set up initially."
"The biggest advantage of Amazon RDS, which is basically an AWS service, is that you can customize it."
"Google Cloud SQL is easy to start with and allows me to scale as needed, which is advantageous from a developer perspective."
"The most valuable features are that it's easy to use, simple, and user-friendly."
"It supports different databases, like Postgres and MySQL."
"The implementation part of the product was easy."
"Google Cloud SQL provides complete customization options, along with a dashboarding tool and a comprehensive suite of tools that can be used to customize and build any application needed."
"I found its storage and security to be the most valuable. It was a good experience. It is also very stable and scalable, and its support is perfect."
"Licensing is not applicable; pricing is reasonable."
"This is a stable solution and offers good performance."
 

Cons

"I feel Amazon RDS should have a lot of functionalities to make monitoring within the database easier."
"Some of the features will not be there. For example, some on-premises things we want to set up will not be supported there. There are some challenges that they are fixing."
"It would be helpful if they made it easier to migrate from an existing on-premises solution to the cloud-based service."
"There are a few aspects of database management that have room for improvement. There are a few parameters in the solution that are a bit unclear at our end as it's not understandable."
"The performance is not always as good as MySQL running on its own EC2 instance."
"In the next release, it would be great to have access to core parameters to improve or tweak the performance."
"The solution could improve by adding a sandbox environment and more security."
"The product's high price is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"I would like to see better availability of the product in different regions. It should also improve the security with encryption."
"Better integration with other tools could improve this solution."
"For data analysis, the AI area of the product has certain shortcomings where improvements are required."
"They could improve documentation and dashboard stability for efficient user experience and database management."
"I would appreciate more flexibility with specific extensions applicable to engines like PostgreSQL. This would enhance the capabilities of Google Cloud SQL."
"The most vulnerable problem with Google SQL is that while you can customize your access control list, it provides you with a public IP address."
"Google Cloud SQL still needs better connectivity to outside, existing data sources."
"The product's user interface could be more user-friendly to improve the overall user experience."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"By using a combination of Reserve Instances and On-Demand pricing, you can reduce the cost."
"The cost is manageable because you can see the expense associated with each instance and utilize tools for tagging and cost control."
"The price could be better."
"Amazon RDS is cheaper compared to other tools."
"It is less expensive than SQL Server. We pay based on the usage on a monthly basis."
"In my case, MySQL is free, and if there are any costs, then it is much less than other solutions since all such things usually come bundled with the hardware."
"Amazon RDS is an expensive solution."
"The pricing of RDS is a little bit high compared to Microsoft... However, it is a good price compared to other solutions."
"The solution is affordable."
"You need to pay extra costs for backup and replication."
"It is not expensive, especially considering the significant reduction in database management time."
"The pricing is very much an important factor as to why we use this solution."
"From a financial perspective, Google Cloud SQL is on the cheaper side."
"While the platform’s pricing may be higher, it aligns with industry standards, considering the quality of service and features provided."
"It's really cheap. It wouldn't be more than, I believe it's around 50 euro per month for running a cloud SQL."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Database as a Service (DBaaS) solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
University
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Educational Organization
13%
Computer Software Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise16
Large Enterprise24
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Amazon RDS?
I think Amazon RDS can be improved or enhanced if it can be implemented with other monitoring tools such as Percona. Currently, I am trying to add Percona monitoring for monitoring in addition to i...
What is your primary use case for Amazon RDS?
Amazon RDS is typically used for AI applications. I am developing it for an AI recruitment agent and for collecting data for HRIS, Software as a Service for a workforce as a service, and storing data.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Google Cloud SQL?
We have set up automated patch management for Google Cloud SQL, and it does on a daily basis what needs to be done, so it is pretty good overall for maintaining our database security.
What needs improvement with Google Cloud SQL?
I would to improve a few glitches in Google Cloud SQL that I have recently noticed. There are a few UI glitches that I have noticed recently, specifically something called data mapping in IPaaS Con...
What is your primary use case for Google Cloud SQL?
I am not working with Oracle; everything I am working on is on Google. I would like to improve a few glitches in Google Cloud SQL that I have recently noticed. There are a few UI glitches that I ha...
 

Also Known As

RDS
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Edmodo
BeDataDriven, CodeFutures, Daffodil, GenieConnect, KiSSFLOW, LiveHive, SulAm_rica, Zync
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon RDS vs. Google Cloud SQL and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.